This is an important issue, because the strength of the agency
will likely be dictated by who's at the helm. It'll be like the
EPA, a force for environmentalism under Democrats, while very
much less so under Republican Presidents.

The presumption is that Tim Geithner just doesn't want a bank
gadfly in the position, but author John R. Talbott thinks that
his opposition is much more profound. Writing at
HuffPo he argues that the banks have never moved the majority
of their bad assets, and that their only way to the end of the
tunnel is to extend, pretend and, importantly, earn their way
through.

And how will they earn their way through? By soaking consumers
through fees.

And that, of course, is what Warren is eager to oppose.

Warren's appointment wouldn't just be a setback, it would
devastate Geithner's entire plan on how to deal with trillions of
bad assets the banks still won't recognize as losers. That is why
I think she is going to face enormous resistance, even inside of
the administration. The next one to oppose Warren after Geithner
will be Larry Summers for this very reason. Then they will see if
they can get Bernanke and finally Obama on board. The pitch to
Obama and Bernanke will not be personal, it will be the same
phony argument that Paulson and Bernanke used to justify TARP to
congress, they will say that if Warren is appointed the entire
world of banking and finance as we know it will come to an end.